Meanwhile, Steve in the next cube over is answering the call as he's next in line, he responds to the email that comes in and generally puts forth more effort than you. This is recognized by management. Steve gets a promotion eventually, you do not. Moreover, management sees Steve's fervor, they want more Steves and they hire more Steves. Eventually there is a dip in funds and we have increased costs, someone must go. Who do you think they fire? (Hint: it isn't one of the Steve clones).

I'm not trying to justify it, but the reality is whoever makes more money for the boss, whether the lower employees make more is irrelevant.

So what you're saying is that you were foolish enough to agree to be available during outside hours. You have no one to blame but yourself for not establishing boundaries, on call hours after hours, finding subordinates to be available during off hours, or establishing competent service level agreements.

Not every job will let you establish this, but it should be set from the interview. And hey, maybe there's threat of being fired if you don't perform, but jokes on them, if they fire you, you owe them nothing. At the very least you can begin searching for your next job where at least you'll be happy and maybe someone can appreciate your real value.

That's his point. Reader is a cloud service and he's losing his data and access to the "application" that google provided. I think you'll be hard pressed to find a service that will support the export of google reader data. Even if he goes to another service, it could happen there too.

However if it were a desktop app, he could just go on like it never happened.

Personally I haven't found a reader app that synchronizes what I've read in my feeds across devices, recommends new feeds from a large search database, allows me to group feeds and read entire groups, or access the service from external apps and devices.

Uh, dipshit, we're still there the last time I looked at my cell phone bill. Personally I don't like filtering through all the ads and images and bullshit when I can aggregate headlines from multiple sites and read only what I want to read.

That is an unqualified opinion. No "good" desktop for what? For games? There's isn't because linux as a game platform has been largely non-existent. But there are plenty of environments with minimalistic UIs that could be good and I think that's what Valve is building here. I'd argue that there's no good desktop environment for gaming, period. Windows just is not and never has been a good gaming environment either, it's just the defacto desktop OS.

If this moves developers to make ports of their games for Linux more and more, I think you'll see people playing less and less on Windows as they'll have the option to run on a "free" alternative. This is good for the hobbyist market.

For one thing, Fallout has that tacked on RPG mode on the PIP-Boy that can completely remove the FPS aspect of the game. But it is also much more focused on training up skills. Weapons are also pretty static and it's tough to create something better, let alone different stats.

Borderlands is a FPS first and foremost with LOTS of weapons, they all do different and FUN things. The game borders on outrageous in building a fun environment to run around. It also happens to be pretty hilarious.

Sorry, I've played and loved both. They're different games. You might as well try to compare them to Gears of War while you're at it.

If you had an old windows system you were upgrading, you bought the upgrade version.If you were cheap and didn't need microsoft support you bought the system builders/OEM version.If you had a system without an OS (meaning you built it yourself) you bought the full retail version.

I can understand the potential of a VM'd license, I don't understand offering one for people that "build their own systems". They already have two versions that work for that.